Talk:Construction modularization from a lean perspective
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
| (8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
*No figures therefore no copyright issue | *No figures therefore no copyright issue | ||
*I think the overall wiki formation of the article is fine. | *I think the overall wiki formation of the article is fine. | ||
| − | + | **'''Answer:''' Videos and pictures is implemented, was not finished at the time. . | |
Content aspects: | Content aspects: | ||
| − | *For practitioners it is a relevant article, because the topic is very relevant . | + | *For practitioners it is a relevant article, because the topic is very relevant. |
*It is not specific related to PPPM. However, the idea lean and critical path is used in project management and scheduling. | *It is not specific related to PPPM. However, the idea lean and critical path is used in project management and scheduling. | ||
| + | **'''Answer:''' The PPPM relation is lean Construction management. | ||
*The length of the article is fine. I don’t think it should be longer, but maybe a bit more in the “Preface” and maybe it is too basic. | *The length of the article is fine. I don’t think it should be longer, but maybe a bit more in the “Preface” and maybe it is too basic. | ||
*I think the overall red thread is fine and the article seems coherent. | *I think the overall red thread is fine and the article seems coherent. | ||
*The starting summary is good and works fine, but I think the “preface” and “abstact” could be merged together and be more precise in terms of starting the “red thread”. | *The starting summary is good and works fine, but I think the “preface” and “abstact” could be merged together and be more precise in terms of starting the “red thread”. | ||
| + | **'''Answer:''' adopted and amended thanks | ||
*The reference is missing. | *The reference is missing. | ||
*I find it hard to say which material has been used. There should be a clear list of reference and link into the text. | *I find it hard to say which material has been used. There should be a clear list of reference and link into the text. | ||
*There is no section “annotated bibliography”. | *There is no section “annotated bibliography”. | ||
| + | **'''Answer:''' Done, annotated bibliography was not finished at the time. | ||
*As far as I noticed, there were no link to other APPPM wiki article. But links to websites, that is fine. | *As far as I noticed, there were no link to other APPPM wiki article. But links to websites, that is fine. | ||
*Own opinion is clearly stated in “ reflections on practice of modularization in the construction sector” | *Own opinion is clearly stated in “ reflections on practice of modularization in the construction sector” | ||
| + | **'''Answer:''' Thanks wrong text headline, it comes further down now. | ||
*There is no reason to think there is any type of plagiarism | *There is no reason to think there is any type of plagiarism | ||
| + | |||
| Line 33: | Line 38: | ||
[[ | [[ | ||
(S142899_I am not aware of whether I am reviewer ½ or 3) | (S142899_I am not aware of whether I am reviewer ½ or 3) | ||
| + | |||
References are missing summary at the end. | References are missing summary at the end. | ||
| + | |||
A) Not many grammatical or spelling mistakes! | A) Not many grammatical or spelling mistakes! | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | * BSB term should be explained before used in the ABSTRACT PARAGRAPH | |
| − | + | **'''Answer:''' It is, under T30 section. Broad Sustainable Buildings Co. Ltd (BSB) | |
| − | + | * I would suggest in general to create less complex and smaller sentences throughout the article in order to avoid confusion for the reader | |
| − | + | * Under Board Sustainable Building Co.Ltd paragraph there is a space mistake “ The2008..” and use past tense as well. | |
| − | + | **'''Answer:''' Adopted and amended thanks | |
| − | + | * Also the numbering can become simpler not 1…..1….2….1 but instead.1……1.1….2…….2.1 | |
| − | + | **'''Answer:''' Adopted and amended thanks | |
| − | + | * Reference at the end of TH30 HOTEL, Modular Constructions impact on critical path, paragraph is missing? | |
| + | **'''Answer:''' Adopted and amended thanks | ||
| + | * In the paragraphs under BSB's prefabrication technology reference is missing | ||
| + | * In lean Construction paragraph double “. . “ error and gap after “.” Exist also in the second paragraph. Also reference is missing. | ||
| + | * Under BCB projects analyzed from a lean perspective paragraph data is rmentioned without reference. | ||
| + | * “Broad Organization” in paragraph Reflections on practice of modularization in the construction sector could be with small letters | ||
| + | |||
B) | B) | ||
| − | + | *Preface and Abstract probably should be in one paragraph | |
| − | + | *Logical paragraph flow without overlapping. | |
| − | + | *I would create a paragraph that incorporates the paragraphs: 3 Broad Group,4 Broad Sustainable Building Co. Ltd., 5 T30 Hotel | |
and name it “case T30 description” | and name it “case T30 description” | ||
| + | |||
C) | C) | ||
| − | + | *Congrats on summing up info and referring on them in Board Group paragraph. | |
Especially the summing up paragraph illustrates a critical support of the theory in combination of this case study. | Especially the summing up paragraph illustrates a critical support of the theory in combination of this case study. | ||
| − | + | *I would add the “T30 HOTEL CASE STUDY” in the title of the article probably]] | |
Latest revision as of 19:11, 27 September 2015
LasseHoier87 reviewer 2
First impression is good, especially the use of a real life case is nice. The layout is thought through and seems to “guide” the reader through the topic. However, it could be "spiced" a bit up if there were some nice pictures, illustrations or even a video. This would "catch" the reader more i think.
Formal aspects: (Wiki article Peer Review template is used)
- The article is as clearly stated in the article following a “case study”
- No gramma faults or spelling.
- Written in a fine engaging style, The sentence is too long and may be a bit too much direct style. Use more formal style.
- No illustrations at all, you mention a video on youtube why not use that one. Maybe the figures showing the building or similar.
- No figures
- No figures
- No figures
- No figures therefore no copyright issue
- I think the overall wiki formation of the article is fine.
- Answer: Videos and pictures is implemented, was not finished at the time. .
Content aspects:
- For practitioners it is a relevant article, because the topic is very relevant.
- It is not specific related to PPPM. However, the idea lean and critical path is used in project management and scheduling.
- Answer: The PPPM relation is lean Construction management.
- The length of the article is fine. I don’t think it should be longer, but maybe a bit more in the “Preface” and maybe it is too basic.
- I think the overall red thread is fine and the article seems coherent.
- The starting summary is good and works fine, but I think the “preface” and “abstact” could be merged together and be more precise in terms of starting the “red thread”.
- Answer: adopted and amended thanks
- The reference is missing.
- I find it hard to say which material has been used. There should be a clear list of reference and link into the text.
- There is no section “annotated bibliography”.
- Answer: Done, annotated bibliography was not finished at the time.
- As far as I noticed, there were no link to other APPPM wiki article. But links to websites, that is fine.
- Own opinion is clearly stated in “ reflections on practice of modularization in the construction sector”
- Answer: Thanks wrong text headline, it comes further down now.
- There is no reason to think there is any type of plagiarism
[[ (S142899_I am not aware of whether I am reviewer ½ or 3)
References are missing summary at the end.
A) Not many grammatical or spelling mistakes!
- BSB term should be explained before used in the ABSTRACT PARAGRAPH
- Answer: It is, under T30 section. Broad Sustainable Buildings Co. Ltd (BSB)
- I would suggest in general to create less complex and smaller sentences throughout the article in order to avoid confusion for the reader
- Under Board Sustainable Building Co.Ltd paragraph there is a space mistake “ The2008..” and use past tense as well.
- Answer: Adopted and amended thanks
- Also the numbering can become simpler not 1…..1….2….1 but instead.1……1.1….2…….2.1
- Answer: Adopted and amended thanks
- Reference at the end of TH30 HOTEL, Modular Constructions impact on critical path, paragraph is missing?
- Answer: Adopted and amended thanks
- In the paragraphs under BSB's prefabrication technology reference is missing
- In lean Construction paragraph double “. . “ error and gap after “.” Exist also in the second paragraph. Also reference is missing.
- Under BCB projects analyzed from a lean perspective paragraph data is rmentioned without reference.
- “Broad Organization” in paragraph Reflections on practice of modularization in the construction sector could be with small letters
B)
- Preface and Abstract probably should be in one paragraph
- Logical paragraph flow without overlapping.
- I would create a paragraph that incorporates the paragraphs: 3 Broad Group,4 Broad Sustainable Building Co. Ltd., 5 T30 Hotel
and name it “case T30 description”
C)
- Congrats on summing up info and referring on them in Board Group paragraph.
Especially the summing up paragraph illustrates a critical support of the theory in combination of this case study.
- I would add the “T30 HOTEL CASE STUDY” in the title of the article probably]]
